Page:An Essay On Hinduism.pdf/88

that they should worship some particular manifestation and that their idea of God should be partial and finite. It is folly to be proud of particular revelation or manifestation, for the infinite being is capable of being partially manifested at any place or to any people, but a true philosopher should rise above all the partial manifestations. He should free his intellect from idolatry and bibliolatry, but may still continue to practise the meaningless forms of worship through of no use to him, so that the less intellectual classes who may imitate philosophers may not quit the worship and prayer too early. On this subject the theory ex- pounded by Sureshvaracharya is this—

Those who have attained the "recognition of the Self (ātmajñāna) may continue their adherence to the various instruments (sādhana) and paths like worship and prayer, intended only to lead an individual to the final knowledge. The difference between the conditions prior and posterior to the attainment of knowledge is this. In the former case the actions like worship and prayer are helpful instruments to an individual, but in the latter case they are merely reflex actions due to the prior accumulation of training and are meaningless and are unprofitable to the individual himself.

The attitude of the philosopher towards an ignorant person, and his worship ought to be tolerant. What a philosopher is expected to do is not to advocate a new god or document for the acceptance of the people, but to raise the ignorant mind from concrete to abstract conception of divinity. To a Hindu philosopher what name you give to God is immaterial, because any name is equally foolish on account of the finiteness of the word itself. The statement would become clearer if I draw upon the custom. When a student approaches a teacher for advice